Marriage certificate for Thomas Kavanagh only so is it possible to find him?

[eyshame]

He is my great grandfather. My great grandmother, Margaret McCoy, remarried as said to Patrick McIntyre and before my dad died he told me he wished he had found his real grandfather TK, hence the interest.
I have followed Margaret's family and found her father born in Armagh Ireland but no luck with TK so I wonder why. Wish I didn't like puzzles so much.

[venelow]

I agree with Annette, back to basics is a good idea. 

Eyesham, you have stated your grandmother was called Catherine Bridget Kavanagh. There appears to be only one registered in Gateshead District September Q 1896.

Do you have her birth certificate?
Is her father's name the same on her birth certificate and her marriage certificate?

What evidence led you get the marriage certificate of Thomas and Margaret?

Have you found Catherine in the 1901 Census?

Many people have started down the wrong path because they have not nailed down all the available evidence. You have to purchase certificates or examine original records to make sure you have not been led astray by incorrect information. Since you don't know exactly which churches the family may have used purchasing certificates is the most efficient way to proceed.

You answered one of these questions while I was typing this. Your Dad told you his dad was call TK.
That leads me to suspect you are relying on oral evidence.

Venelow.

[aghadowey]

In order not to confuse this thread any further (if that is possible) I've posted new information on the Kavanaghs of Brockagh, Co. Wicklow on that thread-
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=449757.msg5864294#msg5864294

[eyshame]

Thanks venelow, That is my grandmother and yes I have her birth cert and yes Thomas is listed as father however, on her marriage cert John Thomas is listed as father. To sort this out I fond a JT who died in 1900 aged 1 year. I then found his burial place and followed that to the address he was buried from, it was a known family address and Marg was living there at the time so I am happy this was her son and my grandmother's brother.

I bought JTK's birth cert and Thomas K is listed as father with mother being the same. I can only guess that as she was only 6 years old when her mother remarried she did not know of her brother so mixed the names up in later life, but I am happy with the evidence that John Thomas K is son of TK and brother to CBK as mother's name and address are the same.

Since I knew Margaret's maiden name from the birth cert of my grandmother I then found the marriage cert for TK and M.McCoy.

I found CBK on the 1911 census in which Marg and new hubby Patrick state they have been married 20 years when they have not. I got the marriage cert of Marg and Pat and she says she is a widow. They married in 1902.

My dad told me his granddad was Tk, not his dad. While it was originally oral info I followed through by buying and double and triple checking the evidence I have so far.

Maybe I mislead myself with the 1871 and 1881 census as TK's father on them is John and a labourer as stated on TK's marriage cert.

I am told after investigation that the Irish naming system is that the first son is to be named after the father's father and so Thomas would have been named after his grandfather. TK's daughter I am told, Catherine Bridget, would have been named after TK's mother. The second son would have been named after his own father, in this case John.   
Finally Marg was married three times and I have her death cert and she was buried from my grandmother's CBK's address.
Hope this helps.

[eyshame]

Thanks aghadowey, I am sticking with this thread only from now on but I have replied to the Kavanagh Carton thread and thanked the person who posted the information for me.

[aghadowey]

I'm the person who posted the Kavanagh details on the Wicklow thread and linked the 2 threads 

I am told after investigation that the Irish naming system is that the first son is to be named after the father's father and so Thomas would have been named after his grandfather. TK's daughter I am told, Catherine Bridget, would have been named after TK's mother. The second son would have been named after his own father, in this case John.   

I'm not sure who 'told' you this but I think you are taking bits of information so that they fit what you want to find.
A typical naming pattern was 1st son of paternal grandfather, 2nd- maternal grandfather, 3rd- father and 1st daughter- maternal grandmother, 2nd- paternal grandmother, 3rd- mother. However, not all families stuck to this pattern and even if they did there are many circumstances which can throw off the results.
Assuming for just a moment that the Kavanaghs did so (and there is absolutely NO evidence that they did) then if this statement and so Thomas would have been named after his grandfather is correct then Thomas would need to have been the eldest son.

[eyshame]

aghadowey, I cannot dispute what you say here.

[venelow]

Hi Eyesham

It appears there is only one Catherine Kavanagh born around the time of 1895/6 and she is the one Registered in Sep Quarter 1896 at Gateshead.

You did not say if you had found her in 1901 but I note did you said you could not find Thomas after 1881.

There is a girl who could be Catherine in the census at Gateshead.  Her father is stated to be John born at Ferry Hill. He is a coal hewer. Her mother is Margaret born in Durham. Her name is Kate Cavanagh and she is stated to be six and born at Gateshead.

It seems to me she is the only child in the 1901 census that could be Catherine Bridget.

(A challenge for other Roots Chatters to find another candidate)

However there are other children in the household that should be investigated. Thomas and Hannah born in 1886 and 1888 whose children are they? John is stated to be 31. (Although the age is a bit obscured) That matches him up with John and Catherine's son (and Thomas' brother) but makes him rather young to be the father of a child born in 1886. 

There is a gap between Thomas and Hannah and the next child Margaret born about 1893. (She is aged 8 but stated to be three in the index.)  Also born before the Cavanagh McCoy marriage in 1894.

And then comes Kate aged 6 and John aged 7 months (Sept Q 1900). Who is John's father?
All the children in this household are stated to have been born in Gateshead but this may not be the actual case.

Also is the Margaret in 1901 the same one who married Patrick? In 1911 Margaret is 37 born about 1874 in 1901 she was 34 born 1867.  I am struck by the fact that in 1901 the Margaret living with John is Margaret J. whereas the one living with Patrick is Margaret E. Could there be two Margaret McCoys?

Venelow

[Annette7]

In view of the fact this thread has been complicated enough already I don't really want to throw any more into the mix BUT the 1901 'Kate' with John and Margt. J. Cavanagh as reported by venelow is not Catherine Bridget and felt I had to mention that.   

It's somewhat bizarre as I've looked at the census' before and after 1901, studied subsequent BMD's and the scenario is this: in Dec.1882 Durham an Anthony Joyce married a Margaret Jane Grace (in 1891 family listed as Joice) - Mary b.1883 Thornley (birth Sept.1883 Easington) and the remaining 5 in Gateshead - Thomas Sept.1885, Hannah Sept.1887, Anthony Mar.1890, Margaret June 1893 and Catherine Sept.1894 (the latter being the 1901 'Kate').   Anthony Joyce senior died Newcastle upon Tyne in 1895 and by 1901 Margaret Jane and her children are with John Cavanagh (who may or may not be the one mentioned earlier in the thread) and they are all listed as Cavanagh (cannot find Anthony born 1890 but he appears later).   There is no marriage between Margaret Jane and John although the 1 year old in 1901 is clearly a child of John Cavanagh.  The following census lists the whole family as 'Joyce', including John himself who signed as such (see what I mean about bizarre).  His child with Margaret Jane is shown as son, but 3 of her earlier children shown as 'Boarders'.

You can no doubt see why I didn't want to elaborate on this but needed to prove as best I can why 'Kate' Cavanagh wasn't Catherine Bridget Kavanagh, never believing it would turn into such a saga.   At the moment we are back to square one in that Margaret E (for Elizabeth) and Catherine Bridget are still missing on 1901 census although I am thinking they should probably be in Newcastle upon Tyne as that is where son John Thomas died in 1900 and where Margaret married Patrick McIntyre in 1902.

So, eysham, after you've read the last 2 posts put them out of your mind as we are only concentrating on Thomas now in an effort to unravel that particular tangle (we sure don't need another one).

Annette